I've read that there are certain delivery methods targeting tissues and organs that can silence and activate certain genes. Will there be projects in the future - say, via mass-vaccination or something similar - that aim to pre-emptively pacify gene carriers of certain types that are responsible for violent behavior? If so, will there be outliers who will no longer be able to function on a daily basis because they get lumped together with criminals? How would this affect police and peacekeeping forces that will have to deal with individuals who - despite the attempts to neutralise them - act violent even without having genetic biomarkers that are related to violent tendencies? Likewise, how will this impact investigative forces that rely on databases of genetic footprints to identify individuals who commit serious crimes?

Somebody made a post related to knife crime in the United Kingdom. It was just a blunt question but if I had to rephrase it in a way that's more representable to wider audiences I would phrase it as such: instead of removing knives, why not remove the people who are wielding knives with the intent of stabbing? The original question was: why not remove niggers instead of knives? I don't see why it would not make more sense to contain or deport individuals with foreign backgrounds to their homelands where violent killings are common practice. In an increasingly crowded society we already have to deal with silencing our speech and thoughts to preserve cohesion. However, I can see a future where even punitive measures like enforcing hate-speech laws will be considered insufficient and thus further silencings will happen and our gene-pool may become an attractive candidate to certain policy makers.

This also reminds me of something else. I was wondering how many policy makers and civil servants are proficienct in using tools like Matplotlib?